Clear Full Forecast

B.C. Has Highest Poverty Rate says Study

By 250 News

Thursday, December 11, 2008 01:11 PM

A new report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives says B.C. has the highest poverty rate in the Country and has had the highest child poverty rate for five years straight.
 
“BC needs a plan with clear, legislated targets and timelines that can be used to measure progress and hold a government accountable,” says Marjorie Griffin Cohen, report co-author and a professor at Simon Fraser University “Accountability is the key. Without legislated targets, we risk promises instead of action,” says Cohen.

“The need is clear and the solutions are known. Other provinces and countries have developed poverty reduction plans and are getting results,” says Seth Klein, CCPA-BC Director and co-author of the report. “Our targets are ambitious but achievable. There is nothing inevitable about poverty and homelessness in a society as wealthy as ours.”
 
The targets for action  would see 
  • a reduction in poverty by one third (from 13% to 9% using Statistics Canada’s Low Income Cut-Off after tax) within four years;
  • an equal or greater reduction in poverty among groups that are most vulnerable to poverty — recent immigrants, children, single mother families, Aboriginal people, people with disabilities, and single senior women;
  • elimination  of deep poverty (those living 50% or more below the poverty line) within two years; and
  • elimination of street homelessness within five years.
In order to reach those targets the  authors have laid out a plan that calls for action in seven key areas including:
  • Make major improvements to working conditions and pay for low-wage workers, who are the majority of BC’s poor. Raise the minimum wage, strengthen employment standards and actively enforce minimum workplace protections.
  • Increase welfare rates by 50% and remove arbitrary barriers to accessing welfare that keep people in dire need from getting assistance.
  • Immediately start building 2,000 units per year of social housing (not counting conversions, rental subsidies or shelter spaces).
  • Implement a universal public early learning and child care program.
In all, the report contains over 50 specific policy recommendations.

The authors of the report say British Columbians want action on reducing poverty, as was evident in a recent Environs poll which showed
  • 87 per cent of British Columbians believe the Premier should set concrete targets to reduce poverty;
  • 77 per cent said that in the face of a recession, governments should focus even more effort on supporting the poor; and
  • 74 per cent said they would be more likely to support a provincial political party that pledged to make poverty reduction a high priority.
“The vast majority of British Columbians want to see a plan of action. Here is a concrete plan,” says Klein. “All that is needed now is the political will to act.”

Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

The CCPA = The left wing version of the Fraser Institute. I have a hard time digesting reports generated from either 'think tank'.
I dont think there would be such high support for poverty reduction measures if people had a better idea of what constitutes poverty in Canada. I also find it hard to believe that anyone with any grasp of the problem thinks that street homelessness could be eliminated completely in 5 years.
There are a lot of people who think that throwing a lot of money at poor people will fix poverty. With all the programs in place already there is no need for actual suffering if you are poor. I have had a lot of experience with people on Welfare (i use that old term on purpose) and i have even been technically poor myself on more than one occasion (though i would NEVER have described myself as such and have never asked for assistance). People in this country live comfortable lives, even with a number of kids without ever having had a job. Their kids dont need to go hungry they dont do without the essentials, etc. Most also enjoy a lot of the luxuries as well. Keep in mind that I am only talking about legitimate welfare recipients. There are a lot of supposedly poor folk out there who fail to declare that they are living with a supporting (working) partner, or who claim to be renting when they are actually using their assistance check to help pay the mortgage on a non official spouse.
It looks to me like the report figures giving already undermotivated people free housing, bigger, easier to get welfare cheques and free daycare will motivate them to become useful members of society. Or perhaps that isnt the goal. MAybe the goal is to make everyone rich and society be damned. It does seem sometimes that people on the left think that differences in wealth are due to chance rather than hard work. I think the reslts of the 'survey' would have been different if the questions had been worded differently.
Perhaps you could tell us what the questions were, Caranmacil. I didn't see them in the article.

You may well be right that making homelessnes non-existant withing 5 years would be unlikely. What is absolutely certain, however, is that if nothing is done, as you seem to be inferring should be the case, that there will definitely be a lot more homeless in 5 years than there are now. We have seen increases during the Provincial Liberal's tenure already and until concerted action is taken to reduce it I see no possibility of that changing.
What about peoples responsibilites to themselves? Minimum wage jobs are for students and youth. If you make minimum wage as an adult you have failed yourself. Society has not failed you. In BC and Canada education is subsidized and hard work is rewarded. Its when one wants to live in Vancouver and make minumam wage that one falls below the povety line (in Van living on $35k a year is not possible, move to Surrey). If someone lacks the brains to get ahead then they can still move to Alberta (up until a month or two ago anyway) and make tons of money through good old fashion hard work.

I support funding for the disabled, but paying people with able bodies and able minds to sit at home because its their nature to be as lazy as possible only encourages the laziness. There has to be a cost to being lazy or else more people will do it and before you know it there wont be enough tax paying suckers like me (us) to support all the social programs.
One of Aesop's fables is a story about an ant and a grasshopper. Kind of how socialism works. Nothing else new under the sun.
The formula used for determining a poverty rate is not straightforward. It depends on many variables, such as size of city of town, size of family, etc. If you live in a large city your income may fall below the poverty line, but the same income will put you above the poverty line in a small urban community, and so forth.

Also, the method used keeps changing and it often depends on who does the calculating.

The richer the province and the larger its cities the easier it is to fall below the poverty line when one's income is relatively low.
As caranmacil mentioned,there ARE alot of abusers of the welfare system.
A lot of people know of some right now, who are collecting when they are NOT entitled or there are two incomes in the home.
I know of a case where not only do they collect welfare,they also deal dope.
Lot's of dope.
Unfortunately,knowing it and proving it are two very different things,even when it is completely true.
These people are not stupid or they wouldn't be getting away with it.
What IS needed is a SIMPLE toll free hot line and desire by the Ministry of Social Services or whatever they are calling themselves now,to actually catch these freeloaders.
Not a talking voicebox that says press 1,press 2,hold please...
Make it easy to rat these abusers out.
Sure,it would take the time of a lot of extra staff to go after and investigate these deadbeats.
So what...do it anyway, becase that would make it a lot better for those that sincerely need the help over the long term.
You may not be aware harbinger but the old fable has been changed... My son brought it home, now the ant takes the grasshopper in and takes care of him. Boy did that grass hopper learn though! Does that suggest anything to you about WHY we are going the way we are going?
I think we need to look at the causes of poverty, before we throw money at it. If my neighbours house is on fire, I need to do something. I dont think that throwing a lot of 20 dollar bills at the fire is going to work though.
What i was implying was that A: the definitions of poverty (as stated above) are plastic and are mostly BS. B: throwing money, houses and free day care are not likely to help in the long term. Most people are poor because they cant seem to look after themselves. Thats not going to change just because we made them wealthier for a little while. C: we might want to look at the other reasons behind homelessness, hungry children and so on. Given the advantages people have in this country it is hard to make a case that people just cant make it these days.
I am with Kevin on this one. The key to dealing with poverty is to get people to take responsibility for themselves.
Poverty, in Canada, unlike many other places in the world, is PRIMARILY a 'financial' condition. Not a 'physical' one.

For here it is a poverty in the midst of plenty. Not one in an absence of the actual necessities of a decent life.

All the comments about laziness, irresponsibililty, etc. aside ~ for we all know there are many out there who are indeed personally lazy, and irresponsible, (and why anyone would want to wish such people on some poor employer is beyond me~ don't employers have more than enough problems nowadays just keeping people who WANT to work employed?), just consider this. If the "production" of such people is not needed by society, (if it were, would they be unemployed?), then how can their continued "consumption" be a detriment to society? Think about it.
Income and sales taxes are not the only source of provincial revenue. This province owns a very large amount of natural resources which are being exploited in various ways. The province gets royalties or other income from the use of those resources - oil and gas exploration fees for example.

Those resources are owned by the people of BC. That's ALL the people, not just the educated or the wealthy, but the poorly trained ones who nobody will employ because they are "lazy", according to you guys anyway. It also includes those who can't work, the sick, both mental and physical and the parent in a one parent family with babies to care for.

Those people, along with the rest of us, own those resources in BC. The money the government gets from them - what is it, 30% to 50% of provincial income - belongs to them, so why can't they be receive some of it so they can live decently? Its their money, so what is wrong with them spending it on themselves?
What did Scrooge say when told that the poor needed help or might die, "Then let them be quick about it and decrease the surplus population". You guys haven't changed much in the last 150 years have you?
ammonra wrote;- "Those people, along with the rest of us, own those resources in BC. The money the government gets from them - what is it, 30% to 50% of provincial income - belongs to them, so why can't they be receive some of it so they can live decently? Its their money, so what is wrong with them spending it on themselves?"

Absolutely true, Ammonra. And 'economically' there's absolutely nothing wrong with ALL of us receiving money 'individually' from the sale of resources WE own 'collectively'. But 'morally'? There's where the big problem lies. For the very thought that we ALL might get 'something for nothing' is utterly abhorent to many people. Usually ones who get 'something for nothing' already themselves. After all, we, or our ancestors, came to this country to have 'life more abundantly'. And if we're now told that we have to pay "world price" for what's already ours, then should we not ALL have a 'dividend' back from the earnings?
From the Tyee on a similar topic:

quarry bay said,
BC is the Candian and world leader in SLOGANS, The best place on earth, the heartlands,healthcare where and when you need it,own the podium, building a better future,the best educated jurisdiction,etc etc

There is a booming BC economy for advertising, Campbell has been advertising all day everyday since june,every web newspaper has campbell and the Liberals advertising, billboard advertising at every school,how could there be a recession?

Gordon Campbell wouldn`t spend a 100 million of BC tax payers money on ads during a recession would he?

Not Gordon Campbell, I mean Campbell is caring, he gave those poor civil servants a little pay raise, I mean we couldn`t have Jeesicc McDonald make less than 348.000.00 a year,

Reminds me of another slogan for BC.

BC goverment,home of the best DJs in BC (desk jockeys)

and I add,
I don't see any of the above critics of helping the poor whining about helping the rich bankers or automakers and maybe soon forest company execs. in BC

Bless you ammonra! And to all you small minded people out there; we will pray for you. Before I forget CONGRATS! again Gordo, another feather in your hat for another obnoxious record.
Why do we blame poor people for being lazy. There are lots of people who are quite well off and are lazy. They just know how to beat the system better than some of those who are poor. Others simply had/have rich families.

Laziness is not a good indicator of poverty. Nor is poverty a good indicator of laziness.
No doubt! The only ones getting rich are Campbell and his buddies.
Astro, if you are old enough you will remember the almost weekly full page NDP government ads in all the B.C. local papers touting the so-called achievements of the government of the day, using the usual slogans. Who do you think paid for those?

Shouldn't the NDP have given that money to the poor and homeless?

Nothing about government advertising is new or a Gordon Campbell exclusive. Some people just want to make it appear that way.

Ammonra, did the NDP during the nineties have a monthly resource sharing cheque going to people living below the poverty line?

I don't recall that it had, so the question is: Why didn't it do what you describe (with some justification) as a moral and/or economic duty when it had the opportunity to do so?

I am also not aware that only the *educated or the wealthy* benefit from resource royalties and taxes, as you infer. Do you have any proof? The royalties and money from sales of mineral rights go into general revenue and are used to pay for the various services that are provided by government, such as healthcare, education and so forth.



So some on this board feel... 'The key to dealing with poverty is to get people to take responsibility for themselves'.

I would take that a step further and say that people by nature are creative when they are happy, and happy when they are creative... when they are creative they are productive and responsible contributors to society.

So it would seem to me we need to enable a society that allows economic creative free enterprise equal opportunity freedom... otherwise we will always have poverty, because we will always have winners at the expense of losers... and only the winners will have creative economic opportunity because of privilege or connivance and through their accredited control of the economic order.

I think it is important to also remember that not all transactions are win-win in society and some have less control over their bargaining position than others. Most people lives today are at the mercy of external forces beyond their immediate short term control.

Currently we have an economic system that is built upon a fake dollar in that the dollar is created through paper transactions that have no economic value (ie derivatives in the trillions, and cheep debt subsidies for take overs ect), and this paper money dilutes the entire real economy of workers, products, and resources. The paper rich bankster affiliated are sucking the welfare tit of the real economy and screaming bloody murder if a working class person just wants a poverty line wage.

This is why we have poverty is because economists refuse to acknowledge that only morality is eternal and all else is balloons and bubbles (that rob from peter to pay paul)... the highest morality in economics is a grass roots local based economy where everyone can make a living serving society in a way that plays to their creative strengths (they will never allow this heresy in mainstream economics). I think that is how you eliminate poverty. Its just a change of thinking away from the accepted norm of globalization lowest common denominator enabled income statement profits... as sold to us by the banksters that created the problems we see today.

AIMHO
Remember that there is a difference between poverty and homelessness. They are not one and the same.

Oh yes and healthcare is not a provincial financial matter. Health care is funded by the Federal government.

cheers
Define poverty. Is it driving around in a 20 year old rusty pickup truck after going to the food bank and then picking up some beer before going home in someone elses rented basement suite to watch a few DVD before going out with yer buddies to the bar later that evening? They have poverty in India Africa and the like. Westerners have no idea what real poverty is.We are not Haiti. Anyone in any Third World country would trade their poverty in a mili-second for our brand of poverty.
Everything is relative. Know what I'm saying dude?
Diplomat, I beieve you have misunderstood my comment. I was not suggesting that a resources check be sent to anyone. I was responding to the comments in the first posts that peoples taxes were the source of support from citizens on assistance.

A substantial portion of the governments income is from non-tax sources in the form of royalties on property owned by all citizens, including those needing assistance. For that reason they are not necessarily being supported by other citizens taxes.
"from" should be "for"
My comment about the wealthy benefiting from royalties was an oblique reference to lower tax rates because of increased income from royalties. You have to earn it to get it.